Raj Mohan Singh DECISION
Raj Mohan Singh, J.
1. The case was taken up for hearing through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner has assailed the order dated 05.10.2019 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Chandigarh vide which the application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC filed by him was dismissed.
3. Plaintiff/respondent No. 1 filed a suit for specific performance of the agreements to sell dated 03.10.2017 and 28.09.2015, for declaration and mandatory injunction against the defendant/respondent No. 2. As per pleadings in the plaint, the plaintiff submitted that he being Managing Director of AMCIPI Electronics Pvt. Ltd., has a legal right to file the suit. A memorandum of understanding was executed between the plaintiff and defendant on 29.07.2008 vide which defendant agreed to sell 5570 shares i.e. equal to 33% of the total shares of company known as VED Sons Engineer Pvt. Ltd., against consideration of Rs. 12,33,33,333/-. Plaintiff further submitted that in the property owned by VED Sons Engineer Pvt. Ltd., defendant is one of the share holders and holds share to the extent of 33%. He entered into an agreement to sell in respect of his share only. There are numerous orders from the different Courts, but those orders do not create any impediment for the defendant to dispose off his share, of course subject to final determination of the liquidation proceedings as the plaintiff is nowhere in picture in all those legal proceedings. The prayer clause in the suit reads as under:-
"In the premises it is therefore prayed to meet the ends of justice the plaint be accepted and by issuance of decree of specific performance in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant in respect of 33% of share i.e. sell 5570 No. of shares i.e. equal to 33% i.e. of the total share of the property VED Sons Engineer Pvt. Ltd. or Anand theatres situated at Sector-17, Chandigarh.
And declaration, thereby declaring the plaintiff to be entitled to usufruct the fruits of agreements to sell in respect of the property consisting of 33% sell 5570 No. of shares i.e. equal to 33% situated at sector 17, Chandigarh known as VED Sons Engineer Pvt. Ltd. or Anand theatres and further declaring the plaintiff to have assumed the status as the prospective owner in terms of the agreements to sell as referred to hereinabove and by issuance of decree of Mandatory Injunction commanding the defendant to effect sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the 33% of share i.e. 33% sell 5570 No. of shares i.e. equal to 33% situated at Sector 17, Chandigarh known as VED Sons Engineer Pvt. Ltd. or Anand theatres situated at Sector 17, Chandigarh.
The Hon'ble Court may pass any other appropriate decree or order as warranted in the circumstances of the case."
4. Defendant/respondent No. 2 Subhash Anand filed a consenting written statement by pleading that the defendant does not want to press any issue qua pleadings raised by the plaintiff in the plaint and prayed that the Court may pass an appropriate order as per pleadings of the parties. Since the parties were not in issue, therefore, an application under Order 12 Rule 6 read with Order 15 CPC was filed by the plaintiff for passing the decree in favour of the plaintiff. In the reply to the said application, defendant Subhash Chand submitted no objection. An application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC was filed by Ashok Anand for impleading himself a........